Posted on 05/01/2006 8:29:14 AM PDT by SirLinksalot
If you give a dinosaur a shocker...you'd better be able to outrun him.
Why not just ignore my posts? You obviously are just here to bash those who believe in God. Have fun.
That would only prove that someone, someday will build a successful time machine, and get eaten!
Actually, you *assume* that something's been dead for 'millions of years' such that it still smells like a cadaver even after fossilization.
There is obviously no way to test this since an experiment can't last for 'millions of years'.
The fact that putrescin is still present is evidence that these fossils *aren't* 'millions of years old', not evidence that there is some unknown condition that would preserve putrescin for 'millions of years'.
The posts on this very thread serve to corroborate Schweitzer's words.
Honey; just WAIT to see what SOME Evo's will do to you!
BTW, it isn't YOUR data; it's just DATA. Your INTERPRETATIONS of the data is yours; and so is the YEC's interpretation theirs.
Why, next you'll be telling us that Democrats want to raise your taxes.
Thanks! However, my point was that since there is an overwhelming amount of evidence to support the human evolution from ape-like precursors, your desire to see it all thrown out is a pipe dream, at best.
Yup.
Its my home page, not an ad.
It's got what I want, where I want it.
Maybe, for your benefit, and for other folk with your concerns I'll add:
myob...Eric Frank Russell, from ...And Then There Were None 1951 Astounding Science Fiction
Barry Setterfield's theory is nonsense. There is a lot of interest on the part of physicists in varying speed of light (VSL) theories. These are not based on evidence that the speed of light is different--contrary to Setterfield there is no such evidence. Rather, they are interested in the implications of these theories and the possibility that a VSL model might replace the inflationary model of the early universe. All agree that if the speed of light used to be higher it was billions of years ago, decayed rapidly, and was not as exponentially high as Setterfield proposes. Setterfield's theory has multiple flaws, including the fact that his model would result in frying every living creature with rapid radioactive decay in the earth's crust. The papers in this field are mind-bogglingly complicated, but from my reading Setterfield has not done the calculations required to determine how changing this constant affects other parameters and to confirm his model doesn't have any of the bizarre and catastrophic side-effects of VSL cosmologies.
Defining evolution in those terms is indistinguishable from a created, adaptive biology.
Haven't you ever wondered why 'evolution' must be described in terms that are indistinguishable from a created biology? Maybe so that you can reconcile the reality to the theory?
Fact is, there is no *evidence* that is inconsistent with a created, adaptive biology; only *interpretations* of evidence.
I prefer to go with the version that God created humans. Makes more sense to me than we descended from some creature that no longer exists yet here we are. I bet you hope you're right.
Along with pieces of a Port-a-Potty!
I was eyewitness to the carving (faking) of some of those "man tracks" in the Paluxy at Glen Rose. Some of them were even carved in soft mud -- and were then photographed and plaster-cast to claim they were actually "fossils".
--EvoDude
If you read my lengthy letter to AIG I posted on the last page you'll see that they do manipulate the data. AIG gave the impression that Dr. Schweitzer was essentially scooping raw marrow out of a fossil femur with a spoon. In reality the fossil looked hard and mineralized, and when the minerals were removed much of the sample was still brittle and crumbled when bent. Small fragments 1/8 inch across were recovered that were still flexible. The actual data is much different than many YEC have portrayed.
Sure it is. Check its history.
- simply says that life is too complex too 'evolve' out of nothing.
And astrologers say that the stars influence the daily events of our lives.
I agree.
Lots of people agree with astrology too -- and for very similar "reasons", including gross ignorance of the actual processes, wishful thinking, and being snowed by the propaganda of the practitioners who have something to gain by suckering people.
The YEC make the most sense to me when you apply true scientific methods to each.
ROFL!!!!!!! Gosh, then why do actual scientists overwhelmingly reject the YEC's conclusions?
Sorry, but Young-Earth Creationism is based on gross distortions of the actual evidence. But hey, feel free to "enlighten" us and show us how "true scientific methods" actually lead to a YEC conclusion. This should be fun!
I've studied all 3 - creation, evolution, and intelligent design as well as criticisms of each.
Translation: You've read the YEC propaganda on all 3, and made the mistake of believing it.
You can drive a truck through most of the holes in the evolution theory.
Gosh! Such as? Take your best shot.
The more evolutionists have 'learned' the more time and complexity the theory needs to be even remotely plausible.
Ah, *another* YEC propaganda misrepresentation! Nope, sorry. But feel free to "support" your falsehood with citations to any peer-reviewed science journal article which actually supports your assertion. Go for it!
Sorry, but you're spewing a blatant falsehood. The age of the Earth hasn't been revised appreciably in more than half a century, and back when it *was* being revised, it was revised due to discoveries in physics which allowed the age to be more accurately measured, and in no way due to any considerations from or for biology or in order to accomodate any aspect of evolutionary biology. Even from the time of Darwin, evolutionary biology has worked to fit the theory to the facts (including the best estimates of the age of the Earth at the time), and not vice versa.
Please try to learn something about science before you make any more false claims about it. Oh, wait, you're a YEC -- you don't *need* no education before you spout off on a topic!
In the 1700's many lines of evidence led to widespread doubt about the Bible's 6000-year chronology for the age of the Earth. By the mid 1850's estimates of millions of years were suggested, and the Earth has been known to be on the order of a billion or more years old since at least 1911. Calculations of the age of the Earth were converging on the true age as long ago as the 1920's -- for example: 4.0 billion years (Russell, 1921), 3.4 billion years (Rutherford 1929); 4.6 billion years (Meyer 1937); and 3 to 4 billion years (Starik 1937). The number hasn't changed appreciably since the 1940's, when it converged to 4.5 +/- 0.1 billion years due to advances in analytical equipment (thanks to the Manhattan project).
Maybe your time would be better spent reviewing the holes in the evolution theory
Been there, done that, found the vast majority of them to be false creationist claims, and the rest to be just areas where research is continuing -- not any kind of "problem" for evolutionary biology.
or even better disproving the Bible.
Why? Do you think it needs disproving?
Two very simple questions from John MacArthur.
1.) How did the rule of law evolve w/o the Bible?
Because people living in groups had to devise ways to get along. Duh!
2.) How did the 7-day week evolve w/o the Bible?
Because the lunar cycle is roughly 28 days, and that number is most handily divided into 7-day segments. Duh!
And *both* of your "examples" existed in pre-Biblical cultures. OOPS!
You YECs just don't bother thinking anything through at all, do you? You just *presume* that everything "must" have roots in the Bible, and that nothing could possibly have come about by non-Biblical means -- and you never bother to actually learn anything at all about the real roots of the things you wave around as "proof". You guys are funny!
lol An embarassing death even for a lawyer.
But others; like ShortLight, would rather gat all huffy and whine; "This is the THIRD time I've asked you not to ping me."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.